And maybe, just maybe, he used Google Maps to get to the destination?
When this thread started, I was of the same opinion as you: that he should have known the neighborhood. But after looking at the map, I can see where he may never have driven that route before, and it’s not exactly a grid. If he followed Google’s directions to get there, I’m sure he was confident in following the same directions to return home.
You follow Google to my address you end up in a lake a good long way from my house.
But…if there were a magic bridge across the lake (think Ponchartrain) you’d find a road thru the woods that would eventually get you to my house. County roads. Two different counties.
Watch out for that one compound. Those people are not friendly.
I’ll expect by suppertime, tomorrow.
Maybe. 
Add me to the list that includes @hajario, @RitterSport and @Monstera_deliciosa’s husband. My brain just doesn’t effectively process sequential movement through space. (With all its flaws, GPS technology has been an absolute godsend.)
I try to fight this deficiency - for example, I will look for distinctive landmarks as I’m advancing down roads/making turns, so that I can use them on my return trip. It never ceases to amaze me how my brain invariably seizes on completely useless markers - “there is a red car parked there!” or “a big white cloud is above the intersection!”
Yeah, that helps. We’ll just tell that red car and that cloud they are not allowed to move until I’ve made my return trip.
Before the days of GPS, I would stop for directions at a gas station and I swear this is what it was like:
Them: “Make a right out of the station. Go to the first light and make a blah. Blah blah blah blah.”
Me: “OK, make a right out of the station. Thanks!”
No, he is actually pretty good at visualizing things in his head. He just can’t seem to use that ability in getting from point A to point B.
Sure. Because that’s EXACTLY what I said! 
I did not state it in my OP, but in my second post I observed:
But show of hands - if a driver attempts to cross a stream on a bridge that does not exist, is that driver exercising due care?
On a rainy evening with no streetlights there? Not sure.
It’s notoriously dark at night here on Hawai’i Island, as streetlights are limited to minimize light pollution for the Mauna Kea telescopes. There are times when I’ve had to drive at night in the rain, and even though I knew exactly where I was, I strained to see details like lane demarcations and road turn-offs. It’s easy for me to believe someone might continue to drive along a road in the dark, only seeing when it was too late that the bridge wasn’t there.
Yeah. Like why is this so fucking hard to understand? I’m very good with directions, and I can see myself getting into trouble with savnat dumping me onto that road and me not seeing that relatively small drop into the drink. I’d like to think I’d be smart enough not to make that mistake, but I can’t say for 100% that I wouldn’t make the same error. (And I don’t think it’s so much Google’s fault as to those responsible for maintaining that road and demarcating that hazard.)
Exactly. Show me the Money!
But informed how? Just by a lone user?
Around here there is a old freeway frontage road. When I5 gets blocked, Google directs people to go on that frontage road- which only saves like 2 minutes, and then blocks local residents form getting home or to work or to the hospital. So the locals have taken to informing Google, Waze etc that road is closed.
Thus they like confirmation, not just a single user notice.
So before passing judgement, I would need to see how this "notice’ was given and when.
Yep, I agree. Even without Google, it would happen.
Were the barricades put up after the accident? Or were they up before then taken down? Or were there barricades but he drove [past them?
Or better yet- Thomas guides. Most Angelinos had one.
Yeah, there also used to be directions, like make a left at the house where the Smiths used to live.
There’s this classic New Yorker cartoon:
Judging by the dates on the google images, there was a fence barricade before the accident, and jersey barricades and a concrete block after. And if we can trust the news article photos, nothing at the time of the accident. Exactly when the changes were made can’t be determined from the info we have.
Which reinforces again that the road dept is the ultimate fault. If you do a street view drive around the neighborhood, it would be easy to turn down that road, with or without a GPS directing you, and the lay of the land does not make it obvious that the bridge is out, or that there even is a bridge. Or a creek.
The road is so short it should just have been barricaded at both ends. There should have been a permanent guardrail across the road at a minimum, and jersey barricades would have been even better.
What road department? All the news reports say it was private land.
The one responsible for the roads! Someone identifies roads, paves roads, repairs roads, builds and fixes bridges, plows the snow. On the south end, there is a street sign for the street: “24th St Pl NE”. Someone is responsible for that, be it a city, township, or private developer. (The north does not, and cars are parked on the “street”.)
Even in the May 2023 street view, there is NO sign that says “dead end” or “bridge out”.
Wow. Come to Arkansas. Ain’t no one cares about back roads. (ETA, these would be county maintained roads)
You take your chances if you’re traveling on one. Road washed out? Well, back up. Turn around if you can. No ditch or a deep ditch. Good luck
In South Arkansas the state highways can be treacherous. Sometimes there’s a shoulder. Sometimes not. If a road or small bridge gets washed out it’s liable to be awhile before it’s attended to. Signs? Nah. Word of mouth is how it gets around.
A stranger, a dark rainy night, I personally wouldn’t depend on Google.
I keep my fingers crossed.
It is interesting that Google Street View has imagery of the neighborhood, but the camera car clearly didn’t drive down the road where the accident occurred. I assume Google gives their camera car drivers a pre-planned route to follow, and I would guess that route is based on Google Maps. Did Google direct the camera car to drive down that road, but the driver said “Nope, can’t go that way”? If Google doesn’t have some way for the camera car drivers to report that a road is impassable, they really should. I assume they would trust heir own drivers.
It looks like some of the houses on the corners have driveways off that streets, so they can’t block off the entire street. But I agree it should be blocked off beyond any driveways people might need to access.
Yes, but it sounds like it was a private entity who was in charge of them in this case, I assume either the HOA or the developer who built the subdivision, not a government department.
At least when I lived in North Carolina, where this occurred, there were a lot of housing developments like this where the streets were privately owned. A developer builds a subdivision, including all the roads in the subdivision. In such subdivisions, I believe how it works is if the developer wants the local government to take over responsibility for maintaining those roads, the developer has to pay them to do so. If they don’t pay, then developer retains the responsibility for maintaining them.
I’m wondering why, if he’d needed directions away from the party, he didn’t also need directions to the party. And why wouldn’t the going home directions be just the reverse of the getting there directions?
Maybe he drove to the party from a different location, like work?
He probably did need directions to the party. It can be quicker or different going back a different way for a couple of obvious reasons including one way streets, traffic or a different starting place.